HITESH SUBLAIK Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application moved on behalf of the accused for correcting the date of birth of the female child victim recorded in the statement of her father (PW-7) from 9/1/2001 to 9/1/2000 was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Shimla, H.P. on 28/11/2022. The accused has taken exception to this order in the instant petition moved under Sec. 482 of Code of

(2.) The petitioner is facing trial for offences punishable under Ss. 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code read with Ss. 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). Statement of father of the female child victim (PW-7) was recorded before the learned Trial Court on 27/4/2022. PW-7 gave the date of birth of his daughter (female child victim) as 9/1/2001.

(3.) The petitioner-accused moved an application on 19. 11.2022, seeking to substitute the date of birth of the female child victim in the statement of PW-7 as 9/1/2000. The ground urged was that PW-7 had given the date of birth of the female child victim on the basis of her horoscope and in the horoscope of the female child victim, her date of birth was mentioned as 9/1/2000 and not 9/1/2001, which got recorded in the statement of PW-7. It was, thus, put forth that inadvertent typographical error crept in the statement of PW-7 was required to be corrected. The existence of alleged clerical mistake in the giving out the date of birth of female child victim in the statement of PW-7 was denied by the respondent. The respondent pleaded that copy of horoscope had not been supplied. The same was not even made part of the challan. Hence, the respondent-State opposed the application.